Modern technology which is shït.

Ubbquittious

Zelda Flabby Manicure wrote: »

People are obsessed with “privacy”. They aren’t the big bad wolf sitting there listening like you think, it’s jonsense. It’s also not about being lazy. They are a fantastic aid to life in many many ways. I’d really would be lost without echos now I’m so used to them.

I’ll soon be building a new house and home automation is going to be planned in from the start, everything is going to be smart from the lights, to front door to garage doors to heating etc etc. Probably have an amazon echo in every room.



I couldn’t disagree more, coincidently I just posted in the the “obsolete” thread how I’m very glad to see the back of manual handbrakes, auto handbrakes and hill hold really improve driving pleasure and comfort!

There are in fact people listening to what people say, 100s of them perhaps 1000s. Most of it is done by the companies in order to help train their AI monkeys.

TheValeyard

Virgin Media Horizon Box. What a North Korean torture device that was.

limnam

Comhra wrote: »

Voice activated anything. I can't bring myself to speak to inanimate objects.

being that shy must be debilitating

mrcheez

Zelda Flabby Manicure wrote: »

People are obsessed with “privacy”. They aren’t the big bad wolf sitting there listening like you think!

The ironic thing that the luddites don't seem to realise is that they are giving away far more of their private data on the very device they are posting from.

Google or Apple etc learn far more from your emails/searches/social media than anything Alexa can "discover" from your random sentences spoken at home.

If one really becomes paranoid that Alexa may capture their discussions about planning world domination, then simply switch off the plug .

You can even ask Alexa to switch off the plug

Atlantic Dawn

Low capacity toilet flush technology, you end up having to flush the thing twice when you have a dump instead of once with the old days system.

weemcd

Any recent laptop touchpad, absolutely terrible, a device from 10 years+ would have a better one.

Notches on phone screens, hold on until I try and watch something fullscreen here with a rectangle cutting into the side of it. I don't know how that idea ever made it out of the bin, let alone people buying them, nearly every new phone seems to have a screen intrusion of some kind.

Those headphone/charger cables that apple produced for their last phone are absolutely laughable. Again I cannot believe someone let this fly.

Any Microsoft Office product since ~2004, Office 365, hotmail, mobile apps etc are essentially unusable. Windows hasn't had a decent iteration since 7 and before that it was XP, nearly 10 years prior. I use Windows 10 on a decent spec laptop with a good processor with plenty of RAM and when it's not installing Windows updates it's disappointingly slow.

The Xbox One controllers that use AA batteries, such an absolutely huge pain in the ass. What is this, 1997? The Playstation 3, AKA a console from the previous generation, released 7 years prior had rechargeable batteries as standard. In general the Xbox menus are a nightmare to navigate, highly complicated and convoluted.

Facebook app largely gets worse with every update.

Itunes got worse after every iteration to the point I think they've scrapped it.

storker

leex wrote: »

Electric hand brakes in cars.

A solution in search of a problem if I ever saw one.

colm_mcm

storker wrote: »

A solution in search of a problem if I ever saw one.

Newer ones are quite good, especially with auto hold.

Ubbquittious

QFN/BGA chips in most places they are used. Makes a product a pure nuisance to repair for the sake of saving a couple of square millimeters on a board

colm_mcm

Virgin/Vodafone/Sky boxes. Peak user friendliness, intuitive memorable button sequences was the original Sky+ box. Gone downhill for usability since then despite improvements in other areas.

One eyed Jack

colm_mcm wrote: »

Virgin/Vodafone/Sky boxes. Peak user friendliness, intuitive memorable button sequences was the original Sky+ box. Gone downhill for usability since then despite improvements in other areas.

Actually yes! The new Sky Q remote - dinky little fcuk of a thing! :mad:

At least the previous Sky remotes were more ergonomic and fit easier in the hand than the previous ones and I could actually see the etching on the buttons! I couldn’t take to it at all and I’ve just gotten used to using the voice commands for everything. I’ve seen these in Dealz and actually considered buying one -

peasant

wifi internet radio

you need a doctorate to figure out how to set the stations and once you do they disappear again randomly.
Then you get lag, interruptions, ****ty signals and all the usual computer related weird quirks where you have to turn it off and on again.

Useless piece of kit

El_Duderino 09

Zelda Flabby Manicure wrote: »

Wired headphones are a thing of the past for me for quite a while already and will soon be for everyone. Bluetooth all the way, couldn’t be dealing with wires.

Yeah bit I couldn't be dealing with charging them so I'll stick with wires for now.

Capt'n Midnight

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

It's an obsolete technology that had its hayday during Edwardian times. Hydrogen cell technology is the future.

Hydrogen is only a way of storing energy.

You have to make it first.

You can make it from water. But half the energy goes into the oxygen so it's way more energy efficient to make it from natural gas.

So in reality it's a fossil fuel.

L1011 wrote: »

Hydrogen cell needs reliable and efficient electric drivetrains. They aren't going to appear from nowhere, current EV developments are driving them

Efficient electric motors have been around for ages.
In April 29, 1899 an electric car became the first road vehicle to go past 100Km/hr. It got to 105.88Km/hr using heavy lead batteries.

Electric motors have respectable efficiencies and power to weight ratios.
Battery weight and cost are the main limitations.

De Rivaz had a hydrogen powered vehicle back in 1808.

Hydrogen is the technology of the future.
Just like it always has been, and always will.


SpaceX have shown that the weight efficiency of hydrogen powered upper rocket stages can be replaced by using larger but cheaper hydrocarbon ones.

kneemos

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Hydrogen is only a way of storing energy.

You have to make it first.

You can make it from water. But half the energy goes into the oxygen so it's way more energy efficient to make it from natural gas.

So in reality it's a fossil fuel.

Efficient electric motors have been around for ages.
In April 29, 1899 an electric car became the first road vehicle to go past 100Km/hr. It got to 105.88Km/hr using heavy lead batteries.

Electric motors have respectable efficiencies and power to weight ratios.
Battery weight and cost are the main limitations.

De Rivaz had a hydrogen powered vehicle back in 1808.

Hydrogen is the technology of the future.
Just like it always has been, and always will.


SpaceX have shown that the weight efficiency of hydrogen powered upper rocket stages can be replaced by using larger but cheaper hydrocarbon ones.

Hydrogen would need a whole new infrastructure.
Even small improvements in battery technology will make it a non runner.

The Tetrarch

Radios/speakers on motorcycles.

Comhrá

Voice activated anything. I can't bring myself to speak to inanimate objects.

mrcheez wrote: »

So you don't use a phone then?

I use a phone to speak to another human being at the other end - like most people. I don't speak to the phone itself.

tmabr

Stupid self service tills. Grrrr. I don’t remember applying for a job in tesco

Capt'n Midnight

Zelda Flabby Manicure wrote: »

Wired headphones are a thing of the past for me for quite a while already and will soon be for everyone. Bluetooth all the way, couldn’t be dealing with wires.

For music Bluetooth headphones are the best thing ever


But Bluetooth lag while watching video is the perfect example of shít technology.

If we could send people to the moon 50 years ago, why can't the headphones tell the player exactly how many milliseconds ahead the audio needs to be ?

It isn't rocket science.

Hobosan

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Radios/speakers on motorcycles.

Think of them as portable radios, rather motorcycles.

Then it makes perfect sense.

CoBo55

Hybrid... The betamax/ Phillips 2000 of the car world.

d8491prj5boyvg

mrcheez wrote: »

... or control your lights
... or control your TV
... or control your central heating
... or read out latest weather forecast
... or read out news headlines
... or add reminders

****ing best invention in past 10 years imo

even then its a bum deal. it cost you your privacy.

4068ac1elhodqr

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

For music Bluetooth headphones are the best thing ever

Not for music quality.
With the constant packet compress & de-compress nature of bt, you are sacrificing any quality for convenience.

Some with an untrained ear mightn't notice any real difference, but a copper point-to-point line auxiliary connection will be better the majority of the time.

Pro musicians will 99% of the time avoid bluetooth, and opt for a hard line connection on stage/recording over anything wireless (even then it will be 2.4GHz broad and uncompressed, with db boost, with a NGate chain).

Many also prefer (very) old soviet 12ax7 (ECC83) pre's, along with power 12BH7 vacum amp type tubes for a 'nicer quality warm sound' into a dual DSP engine, dished out to an array of quadraphonic celestion GT12 or greenback fullstacks.

Perhaps the best headphones to use (for quality music) might be the ageless and legendary Beyerdynamic DT 100s (no bluetooth).

The high horse brigade

Kyson Rough Train wrote: »

even then its a bum deal. it cost you your privacy.

The very device you're posting from has given up far more information on you

One eyed Jack

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

Not for music quality.

Fair enough...

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

With the constant packet compress & de-compress nature of bt, you are sacrificing any quality for convenience.

Some with an untrained ear mightn't notice any real difference, but a copper point-to-point line auxiliary connection will be better the majority of the time.

Pro musicians will 99% of the time avoid bluetooth, and opt for a hard line connection on stage/recording over anything wireless (even then it will be 2.4GHz broad and uncompressed, with db boost, with a NGate chain).

Many also prefer (very) old soviet 12ax7 (ECC83) pre's, along with power 12BH7 vacum amp type tubes for a 'nicer quality warm sound' into a dual DSP engine, dished out to an array of quadraphonic celestion GT12 or greenback fullstacks.

Perhaps the best headphones to use (for quality music) might be the ageless and legendary Beyerdynamic DT 100s (no bluetooth).

Oh come onnnn, a fella just doesn’t want wires dangling and fangling while he listens to a bit of streaming music, it’s the convenience as opposed to anything even coming close to wired audio quality

Though I will say the Bose Bluetooth earphones I have are the business for about four hours music in any given day. As someone mentioned earlier though remembering even to charge them is a pain in the proverbial when I realise I’ve forgotten

L1011

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

Not for music quality.
With the constant packet compress & de-compress nature of bt, you are sacrificing any quality for convenience.

Not as severe a problem with modern kit at both ends; the basic required codec is a heap and most devices never supported anything better until AptX but AptX is going to be undetectable most of the time.

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

Perhaps the best headphones to use (for quality music) might be the ageless and legendary Beyerdynamic DT 100s (no bluetooth).

In a quiet room (hence why every radio station still uses them). Its not just the aesthetics of a 1950s (40s?) design that stop people using them elsewhere.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

Not for music quality.
With the constant packet compress & de-compress nature of bt, you are sacrificing any quality for convenience.

Some with an untrained ear mightn't notice any real difference, but a copper point-to-point line auxiliary connection will be better the majority of the time.

Pro musicians will 99% of the time avoid bluetooth, and opt for a hard line connection on stage/recording over anything wireless (even then it will be 2.4GHz broad and uncompressed, with db boost, with a NGate chain).

Many also prefer (very) old soviet 12ax7 (ECC83) pre's, along with power 12BH7 vacum amp type tubes for a 'nicer quality warm sound' into a dual DSP engine, dished out to an array of quadraphonic celestion GT12 or greenback fullstacks.

Perhaps the best headphones to use (for quality music) might be the ageless and legendary Beyerdynamic DT 100s (no bluetooth).

Ooooh look at you all techy and knowledgeable but I have to disagree with you, good pro musicians generally prefer the kind of sound you get from triophonic exlab trisonic Amps with multi AST flow-ream stacks or the extra amplification you’d get from a set of Pro-tech-10 twin multi tube bins.

Cody montana

Siri, bitch!

Capt'n Midnight

Luciana Obnoxious Composer wrote: »

Not for music quality.
With the constant packet compress & de-compress nature of bt, you are sacrificing any quality for convenience.

Some with an untrained ear mightn't notice any real difference, but a copper point

Oh to have quietness and time.

Mostly I use them in the presence of background noise and while doing other things so I don't get to focus

4068ac1elhodqr

Bluetooth is very useful for mobile calls, wouldn't use for music listening though.
For music performance, really can't see it at all, esp if there is any sort of 0.1sec lag.

4hrs battery is way short, had a nice pair of sennheiser pxc, with NR switch that lasted maybe 40hrs+. Superb sound and bass reflex coil diaphragm or something. All the extra wires were an issue.
Active NR over active BT wins as an option. Also have a cheap (29) pair of Chinese NR headphones, pure value. If the wire should get tangled it just leaves the 3.5mm socket without damage.

For anyone playing Guitar, modern tech again fails, unless spending thousands on high end DSP.
If you've an old Plexi '59 Marshall (Super Lead Model 1959) Amp in the attic, an advert for it could have a queue of folks looking to buy this old workhorse, at a 2k+ price point.
Desired for it's sound, not for it's legacy.

Same goes for an old worn down SwampAsh LesPaul with late 50's PAFs or Hot 57s, timeless quality, highly desired.